Viticultural Performance of Chardonel Grapevines is Altered By
Grapevine Vein Clearing Virus and Vine Decline Disease
R. Keith Striegler1*, Eli A. Bergmeier2, Wenping Qiu3, Fatima Osman4, R. Andy Allen5, Jackie L. Harris2, Sue Sim4, and Shae S. Honesty3.
1Flint Ridge Wine Growing Services, 3088 N. Quartz Dr, Fayetteville, AR 72704, USA (email: [email protected])
2Grape and Wine Institute, College of Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources, University of Missouri-Columbia, 108 Eckles, Columbia, MO 65211, USA
3Center for Grapevine Biotechnology, William H. Darr School of Agriculture, Missouri State University, 9740 Red Spring Rd, Mountain Grove, MO 65711, USA
4Foundation Plant Services, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA
5Viticulture and Enology Program, Arkansas Tech University-Ozark campus, Ozark, AR 72949, USA
Abstract
Grapevine Vein Clearing Virus and Vine Decline Disease is a serious problem
in vineyards in the Midwest and Upper South. In 2009, a new virus was
identified from symptomatic vines and found to be associated with the
disease. This virus, Grapevine Vein Clearing Virus (GVCV), was the first DNA
virus discovered in grapevines.
GVCV testing was conducted in a Chardonel vineyard located near
Rocheport, MO. This enabled the establishment of a population of vines
which tested positive and negative for GVCV. These vines were monitored
for viticultural performance during the 2009-2011 seasons. Yield and
vegetative growth were reduced in vines testing positive for GVCV. Basic
fruit composition (percentage soluble solids, pH, and titratable acidity) was
generally not negatively impacted in vines with GVCV. Vine mortality
increased over time in vines with GVCV. Practical aspects of management of
GVCV in the vineyard will be discussed.
Introduction
Over 70 virus and virus-like agents have been identified in grapevines; most of
them are RNA viruses. Grapevine vein clearing virus (GVCV) is a new DNA virus,
the first DNA virus discovered in grapevine. It is a new virus species in the
Badnavirus genus, Caulimoviridae family. GVCV is closely associated with the
vein-clearing symptom. It remains to be determined if GVCV is the causal agent
of the disease.
Grapevine vein clearing and vine decline disease is becoming a serious problem
in vineyards in the Midwest and Upper South. This disease was first observed in
regional vineyards over 30 years ago, but was misidentified as a disease caused
by Grapevine fanleaf virus (GFLV) based on observations and the analytical
methods of the period. A comprehensive investigation of the disease and
associated pathogens was started in 2004. Through grafting of affected buds
onto healthy Chardonnay, Cabernet Franc and Baco Blanc vines, it was
determined that agents are graft-transmissible. In the beginning, GFLV and
Tomato ringspot virus (ToRSV) were considered candidate viruses. Extensive
assays of GFLV and ToRSV in symptomatic leaves did not find a close association
between these viruses and the disease. In 2009, next generation sequencing
technology was applied in the screening of potential viruses in symptomatic
vines and a new virus was found to be associated with the disease.
The objectives of this study were to compare yield, yield components, fruit
composition and growth of Chardonel vines that were infected with GVCV to
those without GVCV.
Leaves of Chardonel grapevines that tested positive for GVCV showing symptoms of vein clearing, mottling and deformation.
Table 1.Effect of Grapevine Vein Clearing Virus(GVCV) and vine decline disease on
yield and yield components of Chardonel grapevines.Rocheport, MO. 2008-2011.
Treatment
-GVCV
Cluster
Yield
Yield Clusters/ weight
(kg/vine) (MT/ha) vine
(g)
6.7a
z
13.3 a
39
168.2 a
Berry
weight
(g)
2.3 a
Berries/
cluster
Table 2.Effect of Grapevine Vein Clearing Virus (GVCV) and vine
decline disease on fruit composition of Chardonel
grapevines.Rocheport, MO. 2008-2011.
Treatment
-GVCV
Soluble solids
(%)
21.9
+GVCV
22.4
74.7 a
NS
+GVCV
2.7b
5.3 b
23
116.4 b
1.6 b
72.5 b
0.0228
0.024
NS y
0.0042
0.0006
NS
z
Means followed by the same letter do not differ significantly at the 0.05 level. Least
Square Means separation by LSMeans Differences Student’s T Test
yNot significant
x
Table 3.Effect of Grapevine Vein Clearing Virus (GVCV) and
vine decline disease on vegetative growth of Chardonel
grapevines.Rocheport, MO. 2008-2011.
pH
3.27 by
Treatment
3.38 a
6.9 b
-GVCV
26
0.66 az
33 a
0.0058
0.0047
+GVCV
17
0.23 b
19 b
0.045
0.0421
Shoots/ Pruning weight
vine
(kg/vine)
y
NS
zExpressed
as tartaric acid
y Means followed by the same letter do not differ significantly
at the 0.05 level. Least Square Means separation by LSMeans
Differences Student’s T Test
xNot significant
Materials and Methods
1. The experimental plot was located in a commercial 'Chardonel' vineyard near Rocheport, MO.
2. Vines were planted in 1998 and trained to a vertically-shoot-positioned (VSP) trellis/training
system.
3. Vineyard spacing was 1.83 x 2.74 meters (vine x row).
4. The vineyard soil type was Menfro Silt Loam and vines were drip irrigated.
Nodes
retained/
vine
Titratable
z
acidity (g/L)
7.9 a
z
Means followed by the same letter do not differ
significantly at the 0.05 level. Least Square Means
separation by LSMeans Differences Student’s T Test
yNot significant
Conclusions
1. The presence of GVCV in vines resulted in reduced yield. Yield reduction was
primarily due to lower cluster and berry weight.
2. Basic fruit composition was impacted to a limited extent in this experiment. In
general, fruit maturity was advanced in vines with GVCV. This result was likely due
to differences in yield.
5. Vines were balance pruned to retain 20 nodes per 454g of cane prunings with an upper limit of 45
nodes per vine. Vines with less than 454g of cane prunings had 20 nodes retained.
Prevention of Grapevine Virus Problems
6. All other cultural practices were conducted by the commercial vineyard staff.
1. Plant with virus-tested vines.
7. Selection of vines for the experiment:
2. Control virus vectors.
a) In 2008, populations of asymptomatic and symptomatic vines were established by visual
inspection.
3. Use sufficient fallow period before replanting.
5. Rogue virus infected vines.
b) A subset of the asymptomatic and symptomatic vine populations were tested for Grapevine Vein
Clearing Virus (GVCV) by RT-PCR in 2011. Fifteen vines classified as symptomatic were selected for
testing. Two vines were dead; eleven of the remaining thirteen vines tested positive for GVCV; and
two of the thirteen vines were negative for the presence of GVCV. In addition, six asymptomatic vines
were selected for testing and all of these vines were negative for the presence of GVCV.
National Clean Plant Network (NCPN)
c) Vines positive and negative for GVCV were also tested for a panel of grapevine viruses by RTPCR and qRT-PCR in 2011 ( GLRaV 1-5 and 7-10,-2RG, -Carnelian, GVA, GVB, GVD, GVE, RSPaV and
GFkV , and Xylella fastidiosa by qRT-PCR; GLRaV 6 and 11 by RT-PCR; GAMaV, GVFV, and RSPaV-PN by
RT-PCR; and ToRSV and GFLV by both RT-PCR and qRT-PCR). Vines testing negative for the panel of
viruses were included in this experiment.
4. Reduce alternative host plants within 300 feet of vineyard.
The National Clean Plant Network for Grapes is an association of clean plant centers,
scientists, educators, state and federal regulators, and nurseries and growers from the
wine, table, raisin and juice grape industry concerned with the health of grapevine
budwood and rootstock.
It was established in 2008 and is part of the NCPN specialty crops network. The network
operates under the umbrella of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
8. Treatments were a) vines testing negative for GVCV, testing negative for other grapevine
viruses/diseases, and exhibiting no visible symptoms of GVCV and b) vines testing positive for GVCV,
testing negative for other grapevine viruses/diseases, and exhibiting visible symptoms of GVCV.
9. Data collected were: Yield and yield components; fruit composition; and vegetative growth.
10. Data were analyzed using JMP statistical software(version 9.4; SAS Institute; Cary, NC).
3. Vines testing positive for GVCV had less vegetative growth as indicated by
dormant pruning weight.
4. More research is needed on GVCV (distribution, identification of vectors,
cultivar susceptibility, etc.).
Literature Cited
Zhang, Y., Singh, K., Kaur, R., and Qiu, W. 2011. Association of a novel DNA virus with the
grapevine vein-clearing and vine decline syndrome. Phytopathology 9:1081-1090.
Qiu, W. P., Avery, J. D., and Lunden, S. 2007. Characterization of a severe virus-like disease in
Chardonnay grapevines in Missouri. Plant Health Progress doi:10.1094/PHP-2007-1119-01BR.
.